-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I did look at the differences in the versions, but I didn't see much > difference for the type of activity I wished to pursue, but if this is > an issue for the forum, we can accommodate. Thanks for mentioning it. > > I read the FAQ looking for latest stable version which I was not able to > find there, but I assume is the one you are suggesting, 1.10.2. below.
Actually, the very latest release is 1.11.1, which was released this week. But 1.10.2 has been shipping standard on many systems for a couple of years now, which is probably why Steven wondered at your older version. > While reading FAQ, there are a few non-specific tech questions that I'd > like to ask, which could save us all some time. > > 1. FAQ item 5.3 states JavaScript not supported currently in wget. > Would the source for the HTML that I submitted, starting with "<SCRIPT > LANGUAGE="JavaScript1.1">" fall into this unsupported javascript area? Yes, definitely. As to whether that's related to your problem, it's hard to say. My uninformed guess would be that it's not. You say that Apache sends an "authentication code", which Wget tries to use as a filename. It's not clear to me what an "authentication code" is; Wget, however, always uses the filename (plus query) portion of the URL to form the local file's name; and this often runs into problems when the query string is long (the "?foo=bar&baz=quux&..." part of the URL). Is that what you're talking about? If so, then yeah, that's a known issue, which I'm expecting to address in version 1.12. I'm afraid there's not a lot in the way of a workaround, unless you're doing a single request (plus the apparent redirect), in which case the -O (dash capital oh) option may serve for your needs. > 2. FAQ item 5.4 states significant redesign of wget will be needed to > support multiple simultaneous connections. This is exactly what I > needed wget for: To create a load stress on my development server to > test a patch. Are you saying, in unix, I cannot mimic 200 "users" by > making that many simultaneous background processes run wget against my > server? No; that FAQ item has to do with multiple simultaneous connections for a _single_ invocation of Wget. There's no problem with multiple simultaneous invocations of Wget (except where they are reading/writing to the same files at the same time). - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer, and GNU Wget Project Maintainer. http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFH6sFQ7M8hyUobTrERApnFAKCMHP0n8TiSJNkVgwf6l1ffEo4lIgCfVimQ nMQQ9tr/njrFjmbV4KEzOGQ= =FNvk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
